About Me

Tuesday, July 28, 2009

A critical moment has come in the ongoing campaign to save the Republic and restore our Constitution. Efforts to this end, by all the 912 Liberty Candidates, have attracted the attention of the Glenn Beck television program. However, we need to show Mr. Beck and his staff that our mission to retake the Congress from the bailout voters is newsworthy and that the Candidates at the tip of Liberty's Spear are credible contenders who can lead this fight for our freedom. Now is the time, this is the hour, when you must stand up and be heard! Contact the Glenn Beck program and politely encourage them to host Rand Paul, Adam Kokesh and RJ Harris on an upcoming program. Once you have done this, please repost this call to action everywhere you can. Tell your friends, tell your neighbors, tell all of your family that the time has finally come to WAKE UP AND FIGHT FOR LIBERTY!

Sunday, July 26, 2009

In March, Glenn Beck launched the 912 project laying out nine principles and twelve values to live by. Since that time, Jacob Roecker launched a project supporting candidates who hold those principles and values. Rand Paul, RJ Harris and Adam Kokesh signed on to the pledge, as well as many others. A couple of weeks ago Adam Kokesh visited with Glenn Beck and told him about the 912 candidates and their pledge. The producers at the Glenn Beck Show have indicated they may be interested in having 912 candidates on Glenn's show. Rand Paul, Adam Kokesh and RJ Harris need your help. You know what that means, right? It's time to spread the word that Rand, Adam and RJ are here to restore our republic, our liberty, and bring the nine principles and twelve values to Capitol Hill.

Call, email, fax and send messages on Myspace. Be cordial, yet engaging, and tell them Glenn Beck needs to support 912 Candidates, Rand Paul, Adam Kokesh, and RJ Harris by hosting them on his TV show!

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

With the two-party system, and corporate lobbyists and interests, having staunch control over our political system, it is vital that you, the grassroots, come together to help take back our country. Taking ten minutes to read and complete the following will help send one of us to Washington to fight the corruption.

Please email this to everyone you know and re-post this on your bulletins, blogs, notes, tweets, etc. In just under ten minutes you can help out the Harris campaign tremendously.

1. Add RJ to your friends, following, subscription, etc. on the following social networks:

Simply follow that link, right click and save the image. Then upload the image to your social networks. It doesn’t have to replace your official avatar, but if you just upload it into your photos folder it’ll be seen by your friends.

4. Join our email list - at the top of the page on www.rjharris2010.com

5. Donate $25 at www.rjharris2010.com/donate.asp

Don't wait for others to donate. We cannot win this without the help of everyone donating. If every one of RJ's friends on Facebook, MySpace, and Twitter donate just $25 we'll raise well over $100,000. This $100,000 can help get us through the election. This will provide print, internet, radio, and TV advertising; we can win this race with just that $100,000. So for just the cost of going out for a good dinner, you can help contribute to a candidate of the people who will stand against this tyranny.

6. Call your favorite radio and TV shows and let them know about RJ.

7. If you are in Oklahoma's 4th District ... register to vote at the following link: http://rjharris2010.com/vrform.pdf and come out and volunteer for the campaign at www.rjharris2010.com/default.asp#volunteer

8. Re-Post this blog everywhere you can. Tell your friends and family to do the same.

This entire blog is located at www.rjharris2010.com/help.asp and you can use this link to tweet and send in IM’s, Text Messages, etc.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

I am pleased to announce my endorsement for Peter Schiff's U.S. Senate exploratory efforts. Peter's commitment to free market principles, fiscal conservatism, restoring constitutional monetary policy as well as his impeccable financial sector credentials makes him uniquely suited to serve in the Senate and to be a voice for sound economic principles. http://schiffforsenate.com/

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

In regards to Mark Shannon’s half-hearted retraction of his potentially libelous allegations that RJ Harris is a "shaven headed Nazi", and in regard to Shannon's continued allegations that the Harris 2010 campaign supports 911 conspiracies; the campaign offers the following response:

Comparing our veterans and Mr. Harris to Lee Harvey Oswald, Tim McVeigh and Terry Nichols is hardly any more appropriate or accurate than the original disparaging comment. Again, I am appalled that Mr. Shannon would be allowed to make such disparaging comments about our veterans from a respectable local radio station. Should KTOK not begin to take action about these heinous comments being made on their air, we may have to reconsider whether or not it deserves that label. No RJ Harris 2010 campaign volunteer was provided "Alex Jones" or "911 truth" DVDs by the campaign. Our flyers display the caption “paid for and distributed by RJ Harris 2010”, those DVD’s do not. Shannon most likely knows that the actions of random "supporters" are impossible to control. For him to criticize RJ for not "controlling" people is disingenuous at best. RJ has never stated that he believes in any 911 conspiracy. RJ has stated that these issues may have unanswered questions and that a full non-partisan investigation should always be completed in the wake of any controversial/catastrophic issue. A lack of transparency or fair investigations can lead to more conspiracy theories and a lack of credibility on the part of the investigation. Having a fair and open investigation helps to stray off any doubts. Lastly, our campaign has received zero complaints about our staffers and supporters being "obnoxious." However, given the ugliness displayed by Shannon on his radio show the last few days it hardly seems credible for him to level such a charge against anyone else but himself.

About these issues, Mr. Shannon is either lying or is miss-informed and we will have to leave it to the attorneys to figure out which one. On Monday's show Mr. Shannon made his real intentions clear when he argued that RJ was stupid for getting into an argument with a "drive time" radio host. This statement signals Shannon's potentially libelous purpose to destroy RJ and separates his on-air rant from legitimate free speech.

Monday, July 6, 2009

Oklahoma City Radio Talk Show Host, Mark Shannon, reportedly calls a two-time Iraq War Veteran a “Shaven-Headed Nazi” on KTOK’s Mark Shannon Show.

Oklahoma- July 7, 2009 - Mark Shannon, Radio Talk Show Host, reportedly referred to a two-time Iraq War veteran and U.S. Congressional Candidate, RJ Harris, as a “Shaven-Headed Nazi” on his Monday talk show airing between 4pm- 7pm weekly. He also reportedly accused Harris of accosting attendees at the Oklahoma City Tea Party event by handing out literature not relevant to a congressional campaign. Mr. Harris has provided the following statement regarding this matter:

“I am shocked and appalled that any Oklahoman would have such a low opinion of the veterans required to close-crop their hair for service in Iraq, let alone a radio talk show host on a respectable news station. Moreover, my campaign has received no negative commentary either at the tea party event or since that justifies Shannon as classifying our campaign literature distribution efforts as “accosting” or anything other than the distribution of legitimate congressional campaign handbills. Much to the contrary my campaign has received overwhelmingly positive feedback for being one of the only politicians that showed up to hear the demands of the people and answer their vetting questions. I fully appreciate the 1st Amendment right of others to air their opinions but have little tolerance for libel, slander, or defamation.”

Due to service obligations with the Army National Guard, Harris will be out of the state for the next three weeks. Any questions on this matter can be directed to Harris’s campaign manager Jonathan Gibbons 405-881-0951.

Mark Shannon is a radio host on the KTOK 1000 Oklahoma City http://www.ktok.com

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Despite attempts by local Establishment Republican Shock-Jock Mark Shannon to scare away the Republican Liberty Candidates from participating in the OKC tea party, the event was a resounding success for all participants including those candidates that showed up to listen to the concerns of the people and to answer questions. Oddly enough, none of the bailout voters attended the tea party. Moreover, no one showed any signs of angst that candidates, like myself, were present to hear from the people, answer questions and hand out literature. Maybe Shannon believes that since the bailout voting establishment candidates can't attend the tea parties, then their challengers shouldn’t be able to either? I am beginning to wonder if there is a concerted effort by the Republican Party Establishment and Shannon to keep the people from finding out about the Republican Liberty Candidates. After all, didn’t we chant at the top of our lungs on April 15th to "vote them out"? It seems only natural to me that those wanting to empower the people to make good on those demands should make themselves available at public gatherings so that they may be fully and fairly vetted. To do otherwise would be to follow in the same footsteps of those cowards that are unwilling to face and answer to their constituents for breaking their oaths to the Constitution and the American People.

To those that hosted the events and those that attended and asked the tough questions, I offer my deepest thanks and gratitude. You are why we, the Republican Liberty Candidates, are fighting this fight and I will be honored to carry your demands for the restoration of our Republic, the Constitution, and Oklahoma's sovereignty to Washington D.C. Please continue to see past the machinations of the establishment and their willing accomplices in the media. Together we can defeat their efforts to keep us addicted to incumbency.

Mark, in response to your derogatory comments about my campaign last week and your advice to not show up and hand out literature to the people who deserve to know who is running and why; I offer the following statement: The Republican Liberty Candidates stand ready to help the people make good on their demands to "vote out" the bailout voters. We are prepared to be vetted and asked the tough questions because we have studied the Constitution thoroughly. We do not claim to have "cornered the market" on absolute Constitutional interpretation as you say. However, unlike our opponents, we are building our platforms upon the Constitution and making them open and available to the public for discussion. Our great desire is that these pubic discussions will require that more and more people read the Constitution so that they can enter the debate. Through this process, it will be nearly certain that those that win office will be those that not only understand the Constitution but will also be those with the courage to defend it as required by their oaths.

Your attempts to scare me away from meeting with the people have failed and despite your advice to the contrary, I will continue to remind everyone I speak to that the incremental socialism that Tom Cole, Tom Coburn, Mary Fallon, John Sullivan, and Dan Boren voted for last fall amounts to taxation without representation as well as voting for our enslavement. I say taxation without representation because those not yet born and those not old enough to vote will be the ones left to pay the check and they did not have a say in this generational-spanning theft of their wealth. I say enslavement because legitimate government and taxation requires consent. Consent has been provided by the American people to be taxed for those governmental necessities enumerated in the Constitution. When we are taxed then to pay for unconstitutional expenditures, like the bailouts, we are forced to labor to pay taxes for those disbursements to which we have not consented. Just as the slave has not consented in the disbursement of his labor so too do we not consent to the disbursement of our labor to pay for bailouts. Furthermore, paying for the bailouts requires the transfer of wealth from the individual to the commons. Justifying this action requires that we agree that the state owns our labor and can take it from us when it wishes. If we do not own our labor, then we are slaves to the state. Thus, socialism is a form of slavery and is therefore not allowed under the 13th amendment.

Lastly, I am certain that you will take issue with me for naming the challengers to the bailout voters the "Republican Liberty Candidates." My preemptive response is to say that those incumbents that voted for bailouts, as has already been argued above, voted for our enslavement. Conversely, those candidates challenging the bailout voters are committed to upholding the Constitution and the individual Liberty and state Sovereignty it defends by its very existence. Thus, the challengers in this fight are indeed the Liberty Candidates who struggle for the people against the socialists and corporatists currently in power. Think about that the next time you have one of these bailout voters on your show while the both of you try to convince us that such a vote is really not as bad as We the People are making it out to be…because it is!

Here and now, we are demanding justice for the usurpation of the power we loaned to the likes of Tom Cole, Tom Coburn, Mary Fallon, John Sullivan, and Dan Boren for voting levies against us. And if our founders could fight a war to throw off this same tyranny from a king, then the present generation of patriots can certainly remove from office the modern purveyors of that tyranny. At the very least these bailout voters will face the wrath of a spirited 2010 election cycle. Wouldn’t it be great if the Oklahoma GOP would see them off in August 2010 before the Democrats get a crack at them in November 2010?

Thursday, July 2, 2009

In the effort to protect the nation’s food supply, the Constitution allows the Congress to "insure domestic Tranquility" (preamble), "provide for the…general Welfare of the United States." (Art I sec 8) and "to regulate Commerce with Foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with Indian Tribes." These elements of the Constitution work together to provide Congress the framework for the debate on protecting the food supply. The problem I see with H.R. 875 is that it reaches will beyond regulating the Commerce among the several States by putting federal regulations directly upon the food "establishments." Such heavy handed actions are not needed to protect the food supply of the nation. Acting under the Commerce Clause, the federal government needs to interact with the states and foreign governments only by regulating that food manufacture/preparation that does not meet certain standards will not be allowed out of the state(s) where it was manufactured/prepared or allowed into the country. It would then be left to the States/Indian Tribes to figure out what level of standards and how to implement them as would be best for their citizens and their commerce, knowing that if the standard is not high enough the federal government will not allow their food to be shipped out of the state/tribe. In this way the federal government can protect the nation’s food supply while not out stepping its Constitutional authority nor infringing upon the sovereignty of the several States/Indian Tribes.

‘But RJ, but RJ…what about food produced/served within the same state, how do we make sure it is fit for consumption in the state of Oklahoma?’ If you are from Maine, that is none of your concern. If Oklahoma gets a reputation for serving bad food people won’t visit Oklahoma. And if you are from Oklahoma then don’t look to the federal government to solve your food issue, look to yourselves and maybe your state legislature.

Our system of justice is supposed to be adversarial. The judge is supposed to "referee" the contest not control it. He/she is supposed to make sure that the rules for defense and prosecution, established by the legislature and the Constitution, are followed by all participants. In this case it appears that the prosecution and the judge colluded to find that the case against the Mr. Earl was weak and that the punishment agreed upon would be the best they could do given the lack of evidence against the defendant. However, if the prosecution's case was so weak, as they claim, then why did the defense not simply take its chances in court to completely clear Mr. Earl's name? The fact that the defense did not belies the prosecution's point. Clearly the defense had reason to believe that there was a real danger of conviction and the possibility of life in prison. These factors lead me to believe that there is something going on here that we have not yet been made aware of yet. Please contact Governor Brad Henry and AG Drew Edmonson and join me in demanding an inquiry into the prosecutor's and the judges actions in this case.

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Using the National Guard, we should secure our borders immediately. Then, end the federal nanny state and replace the 16th amendment with a consumption based "fair-tax." These actions will halt illegal immigration and make legal immigrants both needed and welcome.

One of the core functions of the United States Government, as articulated by the preamble of the Constitution, is to "insure the domestic Tranquility…" Article I § 9 gives the Congress the power to prohibit the migration of persons to the US after 1808. Article IV § 3 authorizes the Congress to "make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States." Article I § 8 gives Congress the authority to say who is a citizen and who is not and allows the Congress to use the militia to execute the laws of the Union. Taken together, this means that Congress can decide and set the laws of immigration/naturalization and enforce them, using the militia if necessary, to prevent illegal immigration. Such action is completely Constitutional and concurrent with the inherent power of sovereigns and the written intentions of the founders.

From this perspective we must now consider, again from the preamble, that the founders also indented our government to be able to "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity (children)." We must also consider that a very large segment of the population, at the time of the Constitution's ratification, were immigrants and that much of the nations continued population growth and prosperity relied upon robust immigration. Thus, we can conclude that the founders did not want to overly restrict immigration but they did want to make sure that it occurred in an orderly fashion so as to "insure the domestic Tranquility," while at the same time "provide for the common defense."

Completely in compliance with all these considerations mentioned, our Republic will continue to prosper from a healthy and robust immigration policy that prevents human trafficking, smuggling, immigration of terrorists/pirates/felons and the importation of weapons of mass destruction. The overarching problem, currently, is not the individual immigrant; it is the illegal and unconstitutional nanny-state. Providing "free" social services artificially increases illegal immigration through enticements. However, these social services are not free; they must be paid for by legal citizens. This disparity of who pays and who rides for free could and should end if we take back our Congress and end the unconstitutional federal social programs that create the enticements in the first place. Once no one is receiving illegal federal welfare, and states are no longer federally mandated to provide services to illegal immigrants on the backs of their own citizens, allowing for an expanded and robust immigration policy would be beneficial to all and in keeping with the free market for labor. Furthermore, abolishing the 16th amendment and switching to a consumption-based "fair tax" would create a reason to want legal immigration since the additional producers in our labor market would help us pay back our near astronomical national debt.